nV News Forums

 
 

nV News Forums (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/index.php)
-   NVIDIA GeForce 400/500 Series (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=63)
-   -   Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit? (http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=153186)

Kain 07-19-10 03:06 PM

Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit? Secondly, can a single GTX 480 run games in 3D Vision with acceptable performance? I mean, it seems 3D Vision cuts your fps by half. :headexplode:

newparad1gm 07-19-10 03:22 PM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Worst case scenario is that it cuts your FPS in half. In most real gaming situations with 3D Vision, the performance hit isn't as bad. Most likely it's because even though its rendering a different image for each eye, it is still using the same assets in each frame.

As for whether it is worth it, that all depends on how your stance is with 3D viewing in general. If 3D gives you headaches, then no it probably isn't. But for me it has added an extra level of immersion and wow-factor into games.

A single GTX 480 will probably be enough to handle most games in 3D on a single monitor at 1080p maxed out. A select few like Metro 2033 will probably require you to turn down settings to get acceptable framerates in 3D on a single GTX 480.

Snake101st 07-19-10 09:46 PM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
I think it is. Look at how much of a performance drop you get when you turn on 16x AA. Now consider that all that does is get rid of jaggies, while 3D enables you to essentially open your other eye (gaming in 2d is pretty much like walking around with one eye closed. and see depth and pop out effects.

Some games look amazing in 3D (Batman: Arkham, BC2 (before they ruined the crosshair but thatll get fixed), Avatar, L4D2, Fallout 3, etc.) while others were simply not designed with it in mind. The biggest issue youll see is with the way HDR is implemented in most games, which often is a type of cheating to make games look better hehe, causing things to render at incorrect depths.

Some games have 2D crosshairs, but they can usually be fixed by disabling crosshairs and using the Nvidia 3D crosshair.

Kain 07-20-10 05:44 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake101st (Post 2289906)
I think it is. Look at how much of a performance drop you get when you turn on 16x AA. Now consider that all that does is get rid of jaggies, while 3D enables you to essentially open your other eye (gaming in 2d is pretty much like walking around with one eye closed. and see depth and pop out effects.

Some games look amazing in 3D (Batman: Arkham, BC2 (before they ruined the crosshair but thatll get fixed), Avatar, L4D2, Fallout 3, etc.) while others were simply not designed with it in mind. The biggest issue youll see is with the way HDR is implemented in most games, which often is a type of cheating to make games look better hehe, causing things to render at incorrect depths.

Some games have 2D crosshairs, but they can usually be fixed by disabling crosshairs and using the Nvidia 3D crosshair.

How does your single GTX 460 handle games in 3D Vision? Are you able to play games at max settings with 3D Vision? Do you have any performance issues when running in 3D Vision do the point that you have to turn-off 3D Vision?

artem 07-20-10 11:24 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
If you want to damage your 3d perception - go on, play in 3d.

I won't ever touch pseudo 3d ever again (the only time I experienced it when I was watching Avatar).

newparad1gm 07-20-10 12:30 PM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by artem (Post 2290130)
If you want to damage your 3d perception - go on, play in 3d.

I won't ever touch pseudo 3d ever again (the only time I experienced it when I was watching Avatar).

Yes, tell that to the professionals who work on an everyday basis using "pseudo-3d," as you put it, doing CAD work. I'm sure they are all running into walls and getting into car accidents on their way home due to all that damage to their depth perception this is causing. There are no proven studies showing that stereoscopic viewing is any more damaging to vision than regular viewing on a 2D screen. And to the studies that claim that 3D might be damaging to children's developing eyes, well there are a lot of things that children shouldn't do that adults can.

Snake101st 07-20-10 09:40 PM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain (Post 2290018)
How does your single GTX 460 handle games in 3D Vision? Are you able to play games at max settings with 3D Vision? Do you have any performance issues when running in 3D Vision do the point that you have to turn-off 3D Vision?

Actually Im still running a single GTX 260, my 2x 1GB GTX 460's wont come until Thursday.

Games run well even on the 260- I can max or close to max out pretty much any game. I dont mind getting half the FPS for 3D. Once the 460's come and I sell my last 260 Ill be golden! :captnkill:

tornadog 07-21-10 09:38 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
I am using a gtx 470 with my old core2duo setup and 3d vision, and I can play everything at 1080p. I generally max out everything but set HDR/Bloom/Blur to low or off and shadows to low/off. I agree with one of the statements above, that 3d gaming truly opens up ur 2 eyes. Its pretty amazing the first time you see it. And even after the novelty wears off, you will definitely appreciate it over going 2D.

Some of the games I really liked in 3d are BFBC2, Just Cause 2, Empire Total War, Blur, Batman, Metro 2033, AC2 and PoP:Forgotten Sands.

ragejg 07-21-10 09:58 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
I bet the original FEAR as well as FEAR 2 are fun in 3D, as well as Prey. :D

SirPauly 07-21-10 10:52 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain (Post 2290018)
How does your single GTX 460 handle games in 3D Vision? Are you able to play games at max settings with 3D Vision? Do you have any performance issues when running in 3D Vision do the point that you have to turn-off 3D Vision?

If you expect to play 3d Vision with maxed settings from a performance and setting point-of-view in everything -- you may be disappointed. There are sacrifices, from disabling settings or turning down some settings to receive a quality Stereo 3d experience. This is why nVidia has a profile and rating system as a gauge or help the person to receive a quality experience.

Stereo3d is a performance hit -- there is no other way to express it. The lesser hardware -- the more sacrifices -- the more powerful hardware, including Sli, the less sacrifices when the subject is performance.

And then there is Cross-talk and how much tolerance a gamer can handle. Thankfully, there is control of depth and convergence to help here to tweak.

Now, does 3d stereo really improve immersion and gaming experiences? For me, you better believe it because it offers a true dimensional feel that a 2d gaming experience could only dream about. Subtle effects are heightened and every things feels real and part of the game itself - to feel like you are in the screen and some of the game-play comes out of the screen.

It's a welcomed choice and if someone doesn't like -- it's all good -- no one is forcing anyone at all.

fasedww 07-21-10 11:14 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
How about my three gtx 470's Tri SLi work right?:) Just have to get a 120HZ Refresh monitor?

josiahsuarez 07-21-10 11:33 AM

Re: Is 3D Vision worth the performance hit?
 
stereoscopic 3D is something that's IMO before it's time. it has existed since the 50s (red and blue glasses) and recently has been upgradded wiith clear lenses (RealD like used in Avatar, or Nvidia 3D vision). all these solutions have the disadvantage of requiring special glasses, which even if you forgive the additional cost are just a hassle. I will wear special glasses for a special event like Avatar, but no way in hell would I put on my special glasses every time I want to play a videogame.

the real solution is autostereoscopic 3D, which doesn't require glasses. unforetuneately all the existing or immediately upcoming solutions still require glasses, so no thanks (again just IMO). the first "good" solution is the autostereoscopic Nintendo 3DS which is coming in the beginning of 2011. but it's a portable system, so the size of the screen is quite small. there are numerous technical challenges to overcome before you'll be able to buy a screen large enough for your computer or living room that's autostereoscopic. so count me out until then.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.